I AM GAY PREACHY MAN AND YOU WILL LISTEN TO ME; or, No longer just a library blog

Before I start, I’d like to preface this by saying that now that it’s no longer an assessment task, this blog is not gonna be just about library things anymore. If I decide to blog about anything, it will be about ANYTHING, whether the subject matter be something intellectual, something fictional, random bitching and moaning, whatever. If you have a problem with this, instead of complaining about it, please just leave quietly cuz I’m me, this is my blog, I’m gonna talk about what I wanna talk about and if that’s an issue for you I will reach through the computer and beat the ever loving crap out of you. If you have a legitimate problem with the content and would like to argue your case, by all means do that. Just make sure it's a logical and valid point otherwise see above re: reaching through the computer and beating the ever loving crap out of you. With that in mind, if you decide to stick around to read my random rants about whatever, thank you for reading and I’ll try not to bore you too much with my INCREDIBLE NERDYNESS AND GEEKITUDE. Also, expect a newfound lack of formality. For instance, nerdyness and geekitude. NEW WORDS WILL EXIST, I SHIT YOU NOT. Also swearing, duh.

So, for those of you that have decided to stick around and read my little-ish rambles and rants, I would like to start with something that pisses me off to no end: heteronormativity. Yeah that’s right, I can use big words that exist but aren’t in words spellcheck. Whatcha gonna do about it?

Anywho, heteronormativity. For those of you that haven’t heard the term and can’t use your epic skills of deduction to figure it out, heteronormativity is the idea that “people fall into distinct and complementary genders (man and woman) with natural roles in life.”[i] That’s the Wikipedia definition, and if you don’t believe me, I’ve at least tried to include the link in an endnote. I’m not sure if endnotes work with blogger, but if not I’ll figure something out. But it’s a pretty spot on definition. In my opinion the only thing it really leaves out is that it includes traditionally thinking of people as though they were heterosexual. I’m not saying that this isn’t something that I’m exempt from because I do it too and it leads to extreme amounts of grrr. It does not make me happy. But it is maddening. For those of you that aren’t my friend on facebook (assuming anyone that I’ve friended on facebook is reading this), I recently bought Magic Mike and the salesperson thought that I was buying it for a girl. Now, it’s fair enough that I was arguing with my sister about her lack of an income since she’s too young to get a job or claim youth allowance, so the salesperson may have thought it was for her. But it bugs me that the assumption would just be made that I was buying it for a girl in the first place. Is it really that difficult to believe that I am a raging ‘mo that wanted a peek of Channing Tatum’s abs while he and several other hot dudes are playing the roles of male strippers? Cuz I wanted a bit of a peek at various hot dudes playing male strippers. I like that shit. It’s very pleasant.

In a broader sense, after I come out to someone, I’m generally told that they didn’t expect me to be a fagatron. Which, on one hand, yay, I’m less likely to get the crap beaten out of me just cuz I enjoy adult human male specimens. On the other, bummer, cuz dudes are less likely to come up to me cuz they think I’ll beat the crap out of them for enjoying adult human male specimens. And why should we be afraid that that’s gonna happen? It’s 20-fucking-12, nearly 20-fucking-13, and while we don’t have to fear being prosecuted by the law in most places cuz we like to do other dudes, we shouldn’t have to be afraid that we’re gonna get attacked for walking down the street and holding hands with another man. I’ve long since accepted that humans are generally bastards. I’m also occasionally an idealist. I would think that by 2012 the LGBTIAQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, Androgynous, Queer) community wouldn’t have to worry about being the next Matthew Shepard. We shouldn’t have people realizing that they’re gay that take their own lives because they don’t think that they’ll be supported by friends or family, or because they’re bullied (in general, not just homophobic bullying), or because they hate themselves because they’ve been taught that being gay is wrong. Bullshit. If being gay is wrong, then I don’t wanna be right. Cuz it is awesome, minus all the fear of imminent homo-cide and discrimination.

Dear lord, I may have gotten preachy. I apologize for that, if you see preachyness. But I would have gotten around to an “I’M GAY AND YOU SHOULD ALL LISTEN TO ME” post eventually, good to at least try and get it out of the way now. For the record, I’m only apologizing for possible preachyness, not the content of the preachy. Cuz I mean that shit.

---

[i] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heteronormativity

Viva la revolution!

In Lauren Barack’s article ‘Study: U.K. Kids Reading Less, But Digital Formats Pick Up’ on www.slj.com, she writes of the trend in kids that enjoy reading remaining approximately the same as they did in 2005, but that the multitude of other activities is reducing the time they spend on actually sitting down and reading a book. She also notes the decreasing trends in reading in schools and the apparently increasing trend that 16 year olds would be embarrassed if their friends saw them reading. However, Barack then goes on to state that reading outside of class time has grown in number on digital formats from e-Readers to social media. And just when readers who have gone into this blog looking for information on libraries are thinking “what does this marginally interesting article have to do with libraries and what drugs is google on to send me here?” Barack answers by stating that librarians can use the findings that she has presented in this blog (presumably from actual studies) to redefine reading to match the modern era, and to help eliminate the stigma of reading by helping kids recognize that they are readers everytime they read something on facebook, or on a text message, or on a video game, not just when they sit down with a newspaper or a book and actually set to reading.

And she has a point. I don’t have a problem with reading, I rather enjoy it and I don’t really care if people see me reading because most people think I’m a nerd anyway. But during my time at high school, particularly in years 7-10, I noticed a massive stigma against reading. Reading wasn’t considered “cool”. And in high school, with the puberty happening and everything, everyone thinks that being cool will make it easier, when all it does is turn you into a jackass. But these “popular” people played video games, they read their facebooks and their text messages, never realizing that they were actually reading, nothing particularly substantial, but reading nonetheless. And as a bitter, jaded, anti-popular people potentially hipster person, I rather like the idea that those morons have been massively trolled, and with technology so intrinsic in how people live their day-to-day lives, they won’t be able to escape reading. But I do hope that librarians, English teachers, parents, whoever can teach children that reading texts or facebook or anything with words, does in fact count as reading. I hope that that will help reduce the stigma towards reading, and that it will become more accepted, particularly in schools. And I hope that it will spark ideas in schools that dispel the notions of popularity, kind of like the Enlightenment sparking idea towards revolution, only without all the death and bloodshed.

Information? At least it's not Twilight

In her article ‘What is information and is it still what we do in public libraries?’ blogger Michelle McLean explores the very definition of information, and whether fictional resources (novels, DVDs, etc.) are considered to be information. She does this by questioning whether or not the oft repeated phrase that libraries are all about information, and then recounting the point of view of a friend of hers, as well as that of Hamish Curry. McLean considers the services that the library that she works at offers, and ultimately concludes that, while she still isn’t sure whether or not fiction is actually information, a lot of the services offered by libraries still is, and that is what she will be thinking about the next time someone says that libraries are all about information.

And this fascinates me. For starters, the very idea of fiction being information isn’t something that I’ve questioned much. To me, fiction can be extremely informative, for example ‘A Series of Unfortunate Events’ by Lemony Snicket. I am a massive fan of these books, in part because of the cynicism that I can derive from the books, and in part because they’re capable of being extremely informative, giving definitions for dozens of words in each book. If a work of fiction is written well, it can be informative and entertaining, as is the case with ‘A Series of Unfortunate Events’. The exact opposite of this would be something like ‘Twilight’, which teaches the reader absolutely nothing and it’s my personal belief that to enjoy the books at all, the reader must actually shut off their brain whilst reading. Anyway, before I start a massive rant about the abuse of vampires at the hands of Stephanie Meyer, my point is that the “protagonist” learnt no lessons. In fact, over the course of four books, the only things that she ever learnt about are vampires and werewolves. In comparison, the Baudelaire orphans, the protagonists of ‘A Series of Unfortunate Events’, suffered repeatedly at the hands of Count Olaf and had to learn about who they were, what they could do and how to defend themselves against Count Olaf, amongst other things. Of course, another thing in their favour is that they, unlike Bella Swan, are actually likable characters that suffer real, endless tragedy. But even discounting works of fiction, of course libraries are all about information. From magazines, to newspapers, to the computers and wi-fi access, to the library staff themselves and so many more services that libraries offer, no-one that I have ever met has doubted that libraries are massive centres of information. Even if they are stupid enough to wonder what the big deal is about books, if they want information and can’t find the information themselves online (because let’s face it, with most people having access to the internet, people are more likely to google the information than go to the library), they know that they can go to the library and get some help to find whatever it is that they want.

Fight, morons!

Bobbi Newman is the author of the blog “Librarian By Day”, and in her article “You Can Not Do More With Less – Less for Libraries Means Less For Our Communities and They Deserve More”, she argues the need for her compatriots, her fellow librarians, to stop claiming that “we can do more with less”. Newman passionately contends that libraries can only do less with less, crying that “communities are continually demanding more” as time goes by, but that libraries are also getting less support – both financially and in public opinion – as well as less consideration and partnerships. 

And she’s right. Libraries are factoring less and less in people’s minds. Fewer people care about books and libraries because as far as they’re concerned, it’s all online. I have heard, too many times, people ask what the fascination with books is, why read the book when the movie will eventually be released? In high school, the first question that people ask in English class is “Is there a film version of the novel, and when are we watching it?”. It’s no longer considered a way to enhance the novel, but for the people that were too lazy to read it to know what the hell is going on. So many things wrong with that, I don’t even know where the hell to start! And so long as people ignore the value of books, and think that books are all that libraries are good for, fewer people will support libraries, leading to fewer resources and potentially the eventual closure of many libraries around the world. Newman is right in her claim that libraries can only do less with less, and librarians need to stop taking it and fight for the resources that they desperately need to ensure the continued survival of libraries the world over.